Guest guest Posted October 10, 2003 Report Share Posted October 10, 2003 Rory - We currently have a research module in the Master's degree program, however, it is insufficient and with a bloated Master's program as it is....well....let's say we need to restructure with a Doctoral entry level program. Will > > It's good to know that both Pacific and Emperor's are including this > in the doctorate. However, it seems to me that the master's level > should also include training in research. At the very least, > practitioners should be able to fully evaluate studies published in > medical (both CM & WM) journals. We should be able to intelligently > advise our patients as to it's value, quite apart from any use it may > be to ourselves. To take studies at their face value, even > from > reputable peer reviewed journals, is very naive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 11, 2003 Report Share Posted October 11, 2003 At 2:39 PM -0700 10/10/03, Emmanuel Segmen wrote: >At 1:46 PM -0700 10/9/03, Emmanuel Segmen wrote: >>Words or conditions such as asthma, irritable bowel syndrome >>and >cancer need not apply >-- >Emmanuel, > >Your sentence above is slightly ambiguous, so forgive me if I've >missed your meaning. I see no reason why we should not include >efficacy and safety studies for these conditions in the context of >OM treatment. These are very common resenting conditions in my >practice. > >Rory >-- >Hi Rory, > >Thanks for your comment. Take the sentence above at face value. If >you use CM paradigms to claim efficacy and safety with regard to WM >paradigms, then you are seeking " new drug " approval. You are saying >that you want to spend $500 million dollars and apply for FDA new >drug approval. Are you completely clear with this? There's nothing >to stop you from doing this research on the cheap as you've >suggested. And then you don't need to worry about FDA's new drug >status. Just be absolutely sure that you never make a claim on >behalf of CM's efficacy and safety with regard to cancer, asthma or >any other WM diagnostic state. If you do, you're busted. If you do >decide you want to make a claim, then the scientific work-up will >cost you $500 million. Are you perfectly clear with this? -- Emmanuel, A brief review of the NIH site will show you that there are many listed OM research studies with disease names as their subject, including both asthma and cancer. There are also studies in progress on these subjects, with NIH grant approval. That's why I was uncertain of your meaning; I assumed you were aware of this. Rory -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 12, 2003 Report Share Posted October 12, 2003 Rory, I'm aware of this. There are thousands of Medline studies. How does that change your status one iota with the FDA or any other governing agency? How does that impact my comments and Z'ev's? Emmanuel Segmen - Rory Kerr Saturday, October 11, 2003 5:55 AM Re: Re: Oral/literary transmission At 2:39 PM -0700 10/10/03, Emmanuel Segmen wrote: >At 1:46 PM -0700 10/9/03, Emmanuel Segmen wrote: >>Words or conditions such as asthma, irritable bowel syndrome >>and >cancer need not apply >-- >Emmanuel, > >Your sentence above is slightly ambiguous, so forgive me if I've >missed your meaning. I see no reason why we should not include >efficacy and safety studies for these conditions in the context of >OM treatment. These are very common resenting conditions in my >practice. > >Rory >-- >Hi Rory, > >Thanks for your comment. Take the sentence above at face value. If >you use CM paradigms to claim efficacy and safety with regard to WM >paradigms, then you are seeking " new drug " approval. You are saying >that you want to spend $500 million dollars and apply for FDA new >drug approval. Are you completely clear with this? There's nothing >to stop you from doing this research on the cheap as you've >suggested. And then you don't need to worry about FDA's new drug >status. Just be absolutely sure that you never make a claim on >behalf of CM's efficacy and safety with regard to cancer, asthma or >any other WM diagnostic state. If you do, you're busted. If you do >decide you want to make a claim, then the scientific work-up will >cost you $500 million. Are you perfectly clear with this? -- Emmanuel, A brief review of the NIH site will show you that there are many listed OM research studies with disease names as their subject, including both asthma and cancer. There are also studies in progress on these subjects, with NIH grant approval. That's why I was uncertain of your meaning; I assumed you were aware of this. Rory -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 12, 2003 Report Share Posted October 12, 2003 At 6:54 PM -0700 10/12/03, Emmanuel Segmen wrote: >I'm aware of this. There are thousands of Medline studies. How >does that change your status one iota with the FDA or any other >governing agency? How does that impact my comments and Z'ev's? -- Emmanuel, Scope of practice is defined by each state, and so far as I know I have no status with the FDA. I was questioning why you thought that we should not use the terms asthma, ibs, and cancer in the context of OM research. We seem to missing each other's meaning on this. Rory -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.